2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas I assume it took time for PRC to gain power because they were sabotaged by the British and then struggled with some poor management before swinging up lol Life is hard
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas yeah, after my last reply I was thinking more about power. Like power to do what? By what metrics *should* we measure power?
What’s the point of gaining power on a geopolitical stage if not to exert force to gain something?
zvaigzdelasas said:
You can have a perfect game of Pool, but if you don’t make an optimal move that optimal position isn’t worth much
zvaigzdelasas said:
You can become more Powerful without exerting more Force. One can also “cash in” ones power for force, but that requires action
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u power =/= force, basic physics. Force requires intent. Power is a natural outgrowth of qualitative aspects.
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u and once PRC sends troops to uphold their hegemony I’d believe their power is upheld by force instead of objective circumstances 🤷♂️ if non-interventionist capitalism relies on the power of available labor then seems rather obvious that the country with the most available labor would become most geopolitically dominant no? Again. Why did it take so long? PRC does business with whoever is willing to do business with them under the terms of international law.
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas I don’t care about power and I wish no one else did 😅 I just care about supporting people and improving quality of life. Do you need power for that or just money and proper management?
If money = power then I’ve got my answer lol
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas I want planners and facilitators, not leaders and judges lol
Completely unrealistic
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas for clarity’s sake, I meant America is a great example of how more power does NOT mean better society. I’m sleepy lmao Yeah, our shit is definitely unsustainable.
Is exerting power the only model to maintain civil society? Especially via one large power structure down to the masses.
I have a huge mistrust of people who seek power, and positions that inherently wield power. But those are necessary to an extent.
zvaigzdelasas said:
If so, why have the most populated nations not been the most powerful until now?
zvaigzdelasas said:
Especially given an economic model where power is based on labor?
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u “the more power you have the more you want to keep it” sure. But is force the only way one can gain power? PRC is the most populated nation on earth, does that not bestow power itself?
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u and why would PRC follow the USAmerican model? Why seek global unipolar hegemony? The US has shown that its unsustainable no? So why follow a model that’s proven as unsustainable?
zvaigzdelasas said:
Insofar as PRC doesn’t base its positions on “might makes right”
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas currently law is made by the powerful. Is that the only model available? Can power be dispersed and civility maintained? Like the opposite of diffusion of responsibility lol
It seems like the bigger you get, the more power you collect, the more you want to keep it. I don’t think more power = more order/better society though. America is a great example of that.
zvaigzdelasas said:
If PRCs interest is different than the West-as-such, and if PRC’s rise provides a new balance for international law, shouldn’t you support the rise of PRC as a counterbalance for international law? And therefore shouldn’t you fight against any efforts to stimy PRCs rise?
zvaigzdelasas said:
I’m not trying to Pwn you thru facts & logic, just providing pushback. Don’t think there’s a way to hone one’s arguments other than thru combating (or potentially reconciling with) pushback 🤷♂️ “dialectics” innit
zvaigzdelasas said:
What else is there betweeen “might makes right” or “international law”? If “might” becomes less concentrated, then the obvious replacement is “law” no?
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u yeah there’s genuinely many shortcomings to international law-as-such. But what’s the alternative? Law is made by the powerful, but if Power becomes more dispersed among qualitatively different centers of power, as it has been becoming as PRC has been rising over the last few decades, then what other consistent standard is there? Other than to support multiple centers of power such as communist china to stake a different claim for justification of law?
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas bruh. Asking for other people’s perspectives is a great way to learn and help someone come to a conclusion. Idk how you thought I was debating, especially when I started out agreeing with you and just adding more info.
I just don’t value law as much as you because there are a lot of bull shit immoral laws. Maybe it’s because I’m American and deeply ashamed of our prison economy.
zvaigzdelasas said:
Personally I tend towards a legalistic position bc it’s much less susceptible to opportunistic jockeying
zvaigzdelasas said:
If u dont know what’s right you could very easily just stop debating questions of geopolitical morality 🤷♂️
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas it feels like you think I’m arguing a point when I’m really just interested in different moral perspectives. I feel like I’ve consistently stated that I don’t know what is right
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas why did you stop before the end of that quote? It’s literally a question and not a declarative universal statement..
zvaigzdelasas said:
If that’s not a universal principle for you maybe don’t proclaim it as such 🤷♂️ personally I think in a world after dejure colonialism & with nuclear weapons it’s much more difficult to make universal statements in such a vein, but i didn’t make the statement
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u to quote you, “if there are people who want help remaining independent from a neighboring country…”
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas bruh I’ll come right out and say I don’t know shit about that. Is Donbas killing people? Are they just trying to be their own independent state with help from Russia?
I know it’s unreasonable to believe the current country lines are going to stay the same forever. I know I don’t support mass murder to expand an already massive country. I don’t know how to feel about a massive country mass murdering another massive country to support/create a small country. It’s all bad lol
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u if the interest of the US is maintaining their superprofits - why would the US ever allow Taiwan/RoC to formally move towards the mainland - despite the feelings of the people in taiwan province (which if u check the most recent election in 台北, is leaning against formal independence & towards “taiwan is china” thru the KMT)
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u do you support russia supporting donbas becoming independent? Voice of America (US state media, with every incentive to downplay anti-west-ukraine sentiment in East Ukraine) said that they very much are against the hardliners in Kyiv post 2014. “Is it morally right to say yes or no” to them? voanews.com/a/gallu…
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas so if Taiwan ever said, “yeah we want to rejoin the mainland because it would be best for our citizens” that’d be cool, I can’t imagine that going poorly.
But if China said “you’re rejoining the mainland” and starting killing people I’d be big sad. It’s really that simple for me.
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas I’m not sure what you mean by “worth”. I don’t support going to war for profit (and I acknowledge that’s usually why we go to war)
From my ignorant perspective, if there are people who want help remaining independent from a neighboring country, is it morally right to say yes or no?
I don’t care about a grey area to the legality of their independence, I care about people who want to be independent. I don’t value the authority of the US or China.
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u & re my point abt TSMC being a major part of RoC’s economy - doesn’t break down by company but TSMC is strongly #1 in the major category here atlas.cid.harvard.edu/e…
zvaigzdelasas said:
@2salmon4u “independent” in what regard? The reason “Taiwan” (RoC) was able to become defacto independent in some regards was 100% directly due to US aircraft carriers. If the US were to lose its distinct geopolitical position (maintained thru superprofits), then RoC wouldn’t be able to maintain its independence. Is that worth it to you?
2salmon4u said:
@zvaigzdelasas I truly do not give a shit about our global position, especially since it does fuck all for my community.
See, I don’t know any of that. I “know” Taiwan as an independent country and never looked beyond it
My musings, thoughts, ideas and obsessions.
I am a nobody from North Carolina.
This blog is mostly so I can vent my feelings and share my interests. Other than that, I am nothing special.
If you don't like Left Wing political thought and philosophy, all things related to horror, the supernatural, the grotesque, guns or the strange, then get the fuck out. I just warned you.
whitetiger94things reblogged this from averyterrible
fantasticnumber9 liked this 
theonewiththe-whales liked this buchernarr liked this
little-bloodied-angel liked this
goatguy7399 reblogged this from timdrake-obsessed-fangirl 2salmon4u said: @zvaigzdelasas I assume it took time for PRC to gain power because they were sabotaged by the British and then struggled with some poor management before swinging up lol Life is hard
jugitofraga liked this
bl6o6dy liked this
zvaigzdelasas said: You can have a perfect game of Pool, but if you don’t make an optimal move that optimal position isn’t worth much
boymoon72 liked this
aurailia liked this
secondary-objective-active liked this
clevernutfest liked this
batburgeria liked this 
